Explaining differences between retrospective and traditional pretest self-assessments: competing theories and empirical evidence
- 3 July 2013
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in International Journal of Research & Method in Education
- Vol. 37 (3), 256-269
- https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727x.2013.820644
Abstract
Summarizing theory and results of empirical research, this article serves to illustrate why effects measured with retrospective pretests may be subject to bias and may not always be explained by response shift theory. It presents three contending theories to explain the difference between retrospective and traditional pretest results and considers how the evaluation environment may inform subject bias. Four recommendations are made for workforce education (WE) researchers and practitioners who employ retrospective pretest data to report programme outcomes. WE professionals should (a) consider the cognitive implications of tasking participants to recall information, (b) select a robust evaluation design to encompass the retrospective pretest, (c) provide validity evidence of retrospective pretest data, and (d) conduct additional research to evaluate how elements of the evaluation process moderate retrospective assessments.Keywords
This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit:
- Measures of Program Effectiveness Based on Retrospective Pretest Data: Are All Created Equal?American Journal of Evaluation, 2010
- Therapeutic Songwriting in Music TherapyNordic Journal of Music Therapy, 2008
- Revisiting the Retrospective PretestAmerican Journal of Evaluation, 2005
- Response shift influenced estimates of change in health-related quality of life poststrokeJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2004
- A Comparison of Three Retrospective Self-reporting Methods of Measuring Change in Instructional PracticeAmerican Journal of Evaluation, 2003
- Invalidity of True ExperimentsEvaluation Review, 1990
- Influence of Objective Measures on Self-Reports in a Retrospective Pretest-Posttest DesignThe Journal of Experimental Education, 1985
- INTERNAL INVALIDITY IN STUDIES EMPLOYING SELF‐REPORT INSTRUMENTS: A SUGGESTED REMEDYJournal of Educational Measurement, 1979
- Internal Invalidity in Pretest-Posttest Self-Report Evaluations and a Re-evaluation of Retrospective PretestsApplied Psychological Measurement, 1979
- Measuring Change and Persistence in Human Affairs: Types of Change Generated by OD DesignsThe Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1976